This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

You did finally say something correct when you said they are not obligated to. Sadly, nobody argued they were. So you won that argument against literally nobody arguing against you.

Are you going to continue this ridiculous argument forever? The SCOTUS did not legalize incestuous marriage with this decision, no matter what you may believe. That is a crazy, ridiculous argument. No one who knows how the SCOTUS works or the constitutional arguments pertaining to SCOTUS decisions would legitimately argue that incest marriage is made legal with this decision.

"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

Their argument was made broadly enough to easily cover incest marriage.

No, it wasn't. And it can't. The SCOTUS is limited to only being able to rule on laws presented to them, no matter how much others may want to apply their rulings to other laws. Just like how Lawrence didn't truly strike down adultery laws, but has the high potential to lead to them being struck down if challenged. That doesn't mean that adultery laws cannot be used against people legally still. They can. Until they are either officially struck down or simply taken off the books altogether, they can be used against people. The same is true for incest laws, they must be challenged first.

"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

Good thing for incest couples that this ruling argues for incest marriage to be legal.

No. It can add weight to their argument within the court, but it doesn't rule for them, nor really argue for them. It merely can be used, as Loving was/is to justify why they should have consideration. The arguments against their relationships are still a factor though and they are different arguments than those used in Loving or same sex marriage cases.

"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt